This is probably /x/material but I'll post it here anyway.
Nukes have been around since the 40's, the major powers stopped testing in the 60's. Excluding WWII they were never used in combat. We could conclude 4 things from this;
>1) Man is smart enough to not use weapons of mass destruction and exterminate ourselves, rendering nukes useless.
>2) Everyone has, in secret, anti-nuke shields, I mean it's (current year), we have the technology to stop them before they hit their targets, rendering nukes useless.
>3) As said earlier nukes have been around since the 40's, 70 years of research have already resulted in far more powerful weapons of mass destruction but they are top secret so the plebs don't know about them, this also renders nukes useless.
It's a "Big Player' signatory must-have, until you get it, your just a little bitch. When you got it, however, that will sit the other big guys to table in the club and you can begin... Business.
Zachary Williams
>he thinks we can readily shoot down 2000+ man sized objects raining down on us traveling 7 kilometers per second
Anthony Clark
Would nukes be considered the cold weapon? Isn't used but it's still a huge "what if" threat, and was the weapon that was at the center of the Cold War.
Adrian Fisher
Nukes don't exist. Radiation is a scam.
Dylan Fisher
>Man is smart enough to not use weapons of mass destruction
The moment we developed the bombs was the moment the clock started counting down for us. We're a fucking retarded species.
Ryan Cooper
) Everyone has, in secret, anti-nuke shields, I mean it's (current year), we have the technology to stop them before they hit their targets, rendering nukes useless. Everyone does and it's not a secret, most SAM (surface to air missiles) are anti-missile as much as anti-plane these days, especially as planes are getting smaller and drones are getting more common. There's also laser systems, but missiles are basically effective enough with satellite tracking of launches and triangulation of missile flight paths being uplinked to ground-based SAM sites.
With that in mind, nukes would probably be dropped from stealth aircraft as pilots are able to follow more unpredictable flight paths and take better evasive action. Whether X has better stealth technology than Y has stealth tracking is the major question, so nukes are more likely to be used against low-tech targets.
>the major powers stopped testing in the 60's thats where youre wrong kiddo testing was carries out untill late 90s to the 2000s >PEOPLE BORN AFTER 2000 ON THIS BOARD GTFO REEEE
i hope you have a lot of trust in your "anti-nuke shield"
2397 warheads all together, let's presume two thirds of them are being launched at the US, that makes about 1598 warheads
if your anti-nuke shield had a 99.5% success rate, 8 warheads still get through. if it had a 90% success rate, 160 warheads get through.
Jace Adams
Idk but watch the movie Failsafe, the original.
Christian Baker
anti-nuke shield is irrelevant... see 4th protocol... Nukes can be "stolen" by "rogue elements", smuggled in through porous borders and detonated in major cities... Who do you retaliate against? BUILD THE WALL!!! It's a national security issue...
Logan Hill
1. no we are very stupid 2. yes, thousands of satellites, ground systems, electronic bombardment and if that doesnt knock them out we have systems like C-RAM, with the ultimate "ohshit" being a missile to intercept a missile (tech from the early days). all of which russia has rendered obsolete, all major superpowers have had stealth bombs for awhile too, russia has particularly fast stealth bombs 3. nah, making a bunch of pressure happen very quickly is what hydrogen bombs do best, still some of the best in the arsenal
they are actually used a lot, they just dont talk about using them, high yield warheads arent used often, leveling entire towns/hillsides is usually what they go for
Sebastian Morgan
>Everyone has, in secret, anti-nuke shields Doesn't matter much when you can smuggle nukes into yellowstone and sea-launch them to generate massive waves. >Man is smart enough to not use weapons of mass destruction Tactical use of nuclear weapons is written into Russian war strategy
Michael Richardson
> implying anyone has 2000 nukes and the ability to fire them all at once
Kevin Flores
Noone on this board have any idea of whats stoppable or penetrate able. In general people should be more worried about niggers and other bio weapons. Also: The Soviets tested nukes at the Novaya Semjas until the late eighties. I surely hope we have enough nukes, because if we ever are able to retake Europe or North America. Nukes will be the only way to deal with Asia
Jayden Jenkins
yes we do we been fucking ready for this for decades dumbass
Bentley Sanchez
Russia has far more than that. Combined we have enough nukes to destroy the entire world many times over.
Dylan Moore
>Russia has far more than that. Combined we have enough nukes to destroy the entire world many times over. >Many times over...
What a kindergarten meme. we wouldn't even be able to destroy africa
Carson Jackson
What is global nuclear fallout?
Joseph Evans
Something we can handle.
Landon Powell
There aren't enough nukes in the world to even break through the Earth's crust, never mind destroy the whole planet
Zachary Jones
>the major powers stopped testing in the 60's.
The last American test was in 1992, dipshit.
Joseph Morgan
Iran successfully used the threat of developing nukes as a bargaining chip. North Korea is trying to do the same.
Hunter Garcia
I mean actual testing above the ground, those we have footage of.
Chase Green
Global thermonuclear war soon.
Cameron Foster
>hello Bjorn my friend, I see your skin hasn't sloughed off like Svens yet. Isn't this weather wonderful, looks like the weather predictions were right and it really is gonna be another decade of almost impenetrable dust clouds. Good thing I have this irridated corn to eat. It's the only one in miles!!!
Your fucking retarded
Parker Brooks
you are forgetting some important things >the only time nukes have been used has been against a non-nuclear armed nation >the only times WMDs in general have been used have been when the other side did not have them, with the exception of WWI >during WWII, Hitler had chemical weapons but did not use them because he knew the French and especially the British have them >there are no nuclear shields >the reason why nukes work is because everyone knows that you can't stop several hundred nukes, only a couple, and even then you still lose
Aiden Jackson
Underated post. If shit got real, could easily see Russia or China slipping in a nuke by sub, container ship, or similar covert means.
Xavier Cooper
Nukes are simply not practical weapons. 1000 space launches carrying very complex devices with very fine mechanisms most of which have very short shelf-lives simply won't happen.
Julian Walker
>hello björn my friend will you be needing a radiation suit for another fishing mission or are the geothermal hydroponics self sufficient yet? You are projecting, just because you are an incompetent nigger doesn't mean everyone is.
Brody Torres
So when you eat the irridated food, do you magically not become irridated? Assuming the radiation hasn't killed the rest of plant and animal life
Parker Martin
Radiation is overrated but yes eventually, after years all the fish in the sea will be inedible. It can still be used while building infrastructure to deal with the situation.
If the fish irradiates quickly, as long as the next generation can be protected and set up to survive it's acceptable if one generation dies from radiation.
Jackson Williams
The whole point of the doomsday machine.....is lost if you keep it a secret. WHY DIDNT YOU TELL ZEE WORLD,EH?
Only if your enemy would actually give them all up too
Otherwise you'd just present yourself as a sacrifical gift to the chaos gods
Noah Garcia
It's obvious that all of the nuclear powers have either created or are researching atom deactivating shields. The threat of nuclear war is contained in that only a few of the atoms can escape deactivation, meaning the damage will be very small. Now kinetic bombardment weapons are the future.
Christopher Gomez
fifth option >5)We're all keeping our nukes in case of bad ass aliens swooping in
Aaron Jackson
We have no delivery methods and theyre not gonna set a foot on earth before they've shattered our defensive capability first.
Some people don't know the difference between "warheads", "ICBMs", "SLBMs", "nuclear bombs/air dropped etc". Go read then post LURK MORE FAGGOTS!
Samuel Davis
Iran has nukes or you wouldn't be bargaining!
Jaxson Nelson
Preddy much. Do you really think Israel is the only nation with Iron dome technology? The US and the top 5 powers probably already have the iron dome version for IBCMs. And then youve got powerful satellites that could detect a nuke from space. Nukes are going to get harder to be effective. Those who think a World war isnt ever going to happen because of nukes are going to get a rude awakening within the next 30 years, as these anti nuke techs advances, and as the incentives for war increases.
Ryan Cruz
If nukes were useless, Israel wouldn't have over 200 of them.
The Chinese Dongfeng-41allows first strike anywhere in the world in under an hour.
Nuclear war would be very fucking interesting!
Asher Walker
Clauswitzian trinity applied to nuclear war is the truth
Julian Young
Theyre only useless if youre attacking a technological regional power like Israel/Russia/US/Germany/Britain/France, sjnce they have the capabilities to destroy IBCMs. If your main nemesis are poor sandnigger countries who dont even have centers for military R/D or even a weapons industry, and are essentially proxies for the Russians, Americans or Chinese, nukes would still be an effective detterent. This gulf between the top powers and the middle and weaker powers, will continue to grow, as tech advances.
Brayden Ross
I remember this thread. I remember we had this thread months and months ago. I especially remember this post The same topic, the same posts.
Why and how does this happen? It's not the first time.
Benjamin Young
It's robots or software as a slide thread! screencap and report next time!
Henry Rodriguez
never heard of the trinity, interesting.
Gabriel Bell
No. It's something else entirely. It's not just Cred Forums. I and others have witnessed the same on Cred Forums and Cred Forums.
Bentley Phillips
Nukes are radioactive, and leave a Gamma signature where ever they go.. Im sure the military has anti IBCM systems that could detect gamma radiation signatures from nuke warheads.
Aiden Hall
The waco one has some of the same info. It's slide.
Gabriel Reyes
Learn a bit about retaliation and then come back, you fucking dumb retard.
Juan Walker
Just turn off the atoms
Alexander Hall
>the major powers stopped testing in the 60's No they didn't.
Connor Bell
Yeah there's "weapon testing" going on with DARPA AI bots too!
Anti nuke shields? How would that even work OP? You'd think it'd stop any other form of bombing if it stops a nuke.
Pretty retarded, OP.
Nukes are a quantification of world power, besides, no one has had a valid reason to drop one.
Wyatt Anderson
Dont joke about DARPA
Cooper Hernandez
It's not a nuke if it doesn't give off radiation, retard.
Tyler Wood
I'm not joking. It's for real, shill gate children. Follow bots and much much more.
Yes this is the military testing on US soil/citizens.
Kevin Brown
>This guys doesn't think we can
No one is going to launch 2000+ at a single target.
Shooting them down isn't the issue, it's monitoring and tracking them. You can use nukes to create EMP in pretty large doses which creates a huge hole in your ability to track them on radar. If you can't tell where they are coming before you can make a firing solution well you're fucked.
The current defence shield in europe solves a lot of these issues. A huge number of radars at different locations linked together can see around these radar blackouts. Meaning you can monitor them going in and out. It's why Putin was extremely pissed off about them, changing the entire nuke launch plan would be expensive as fuck and force a lot of nukes to be used for blackouts.
tldr; we can shoot them all down easily, computers are extremely good at that sort of thing. Radar blackouts are the real problem, nukes appear too soon to be able to stop.
Samuel Bell
nukes are not useless at all, and deterrence is reason nukes have not been used
US has the capabilities to stop some nukes, but comes nowhere close to preventing Russia from landing thousands of nukes in a first strike or hundreds in a 2nd strike if we were to nuke them first
by far the most likely scenario for nuclear use is India Pakistain nuking eachother because they're too retarded to establish the close communication and measures to reduce or eliminate misunderstanding and accidential launches that US and USSR/Russia built up
Brayden Adams
If Russia could win through a first strike but not a second then that means MAD doesn't work and therefore the only logical answer is to strike first.
Dominic Jenkins
I'm likely replying to a robot. But Russia can only really take 2-5 nukes and it's fucked! You nuke the US's top five cities and you still have 80-90% of it's productivity.
Jordan Watson
>5) There's a new weapon, unknown to the general public, which makes nukes obsolete
David Reyes
A weapon to surpass metal gear!
Nathan Lee
...
Juan Cruz
...
Jacob Cooper
METAL GEAR!?
Kayden Thompson
>5) There is no nukes at all and all the policy is just a masquerade and a theatre to keep masses fooled and control them. NWO is already maintained.
Lincoln Long
>Dead mans switch Yeah, first strike, blah blah. There will be no survivors at all if happening happens. >5 cities More likely 40
Kevin Fisher
...
Logan Murphy
Nukes have enveloped the world in a 'threat radius bubble field' . That is to say, a pistol has a threat bubble. A rifle has a bigger threat bubble due to accuracy, a sniper rifle has a very long (ground targets, kinda flatened) bubble.
The whole WORLD is covered in the threat bubbles of nukes, shifting silently around as subs move from place to place.
It changed the underlying rules of the world game in a way that's never been seen before.
It oppresses war, a natural destructive phenomenon (like forest fires). But that's just it. It oppresses wars that would improve the world, as well as those that make it worse.
However....the bubble is going to fail. It is only a matter of time.
